Genetic Engineering : The Future Of The Human Race

Should parent be allowed to genetically engineer their children? : The ethical dilemma of designer babies.

　　In “The Case Against Perfection”, Sandel points out that parents could improve and choose their child’s muscle strength, growth-hormones, memory and sex. They can select traits for their children and design their own babies. Further, method of in vitro fertilization also make it possible to choose the sex of the child before being born and Sandel claims that it is a kind of sex discrimination. This will lead to a social distinction and creation of two different standards of human beings that Sandel distinguishes as “those with access to enhancement technologies, and those who must make do with their natural capacities”(Sandel 2009). On the other hand, Agar thinks that people should be free to use enhancement

We are living is a world where very soon it will be possible for people to create ‘designer babies’ that have all the features they wish for. In the article Building Baby from the Genes Up, Ronald M. Green talks about all the positive impacts that genetic modification of human beings can have on our future generations. Green acknowledges some of the negatives such as parents creating perfect children and being able to give them any trait the parent wants. However in the end he comes to the conclusion that the positive impacts of getting rid of genes that cause obesity, cancer, learning disorders, and many other diseases and disorders, outweighs the negative aspects. Richard Hayes, author of Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks, takes the stance that we should not be able to change anything about human beings through genetic modification. He believes that once we start modifying a few features, it will slowly turn into every parent altering as many of their babies’ genes that they want. While he does acknowledge the positive impacts of getting rid of negative genes such as Tay-Sachs, he believes that it is not worth the risk of having parents manipulate all their future children’s genes to their liking. Green and Hayes stand on opposite sides of the debate about genetic modification of human beings and this essay will explore the similarities and the differences of their articles.

Adam Michnik once said, “The real struggle for us is for the citizen to cease to be the property of the state.” In Brave New World, they have created a society where individuals have become property to the government. They must live within certain social classes. The highest social class has the least amount of people, yet they are the rulers of the World State. They use science and technology to create conformity within their government.

Nausicaa was the daughter of King Alcinous and Queen Arete. At Scheria, at the beach, Nausicaa met Odysseus assuring him that he would be welcome at her parents palace, because she loved him. Odysseus had lost all his men at sea because of poseidon who was mad at him for blinding his son a Cyclops. Poseidon had trapped Odysseus on an island for avery long time until Athena, the goddess of wisdom, craft, and battle, and Zeus decided was time for Odysseus to leave to be reunited with his wife Penelope and his son. Odysseus was then sent out to sea, but again, his ship wrecked and he tried to swim to a near island. The next morning Odysseus asked asked a girl standing nearby, Nausicaa, for clothes, since he was naked, and food. He was then taken

The future of genetic engineering results in ethical issues pertaining to the unlawful decision to design a child. D’Souza describes the possibility to design a child: “He envisions that, in the not too distant future, couples who want to have a child will review a long list of traits on the computer screen, put together combinations of “virtual children,” decide on one they want, click on the appropriate selection, and thus--in effect--design their own offspring” (D’Souza, 2010, p.810). Giving parents’ the authority to design their child affects the nature of the children. This authority will place parents’ in power instead of God. Then, D’Souza claims: “Gene therapy has already been successfully carried out in people, and now that the human genome project has made possible a comprehensive understanding of the human genetic code, scientist will possess a new kind of power: the power to design our children, and even to redesign humanity itself” (D’Souza, 2010, p.811).

Most parents would do almost anything for their children to be the best and know that in life they will be successful and ahead of the game, but what if even before they are even born you could alter their genes to give them an even greater advantage. This would allow one to “create” a child who is smarter, taller, and prettier, even if the parents never carried any of these traits. As the human race continues to develop and modern technology continues to advance, we have been able to create new inventions that could potentially help us overcome daily issues linked with diseases and mutations, but although to some this seems like an incredible idea, the motion of one day being able to modify your unborn baby to look and be who you want is not only morally wrong, but could result in drastic environmental changes. Genetically engineering has influenced many debates as to whether the ethics behind the motion are right, and like most scientific discoveries comes with many advantages and disadvantages.

Genetic engineering has been around for many years and is widely used all over the planet. Many people don’t realize that genetic engineering is part of their daily lives and diet. Today, almost 70 percent of processed foods from a grocery store were genetically engineered. Genetic engineering can be in plants, foods, animals, and even humans. Although debates about genetic engineering still exist, many people have accepted due to the health benefits of gene therapy. The lack of knowledge has always tricked people because they only focused on the negative perspective of genetic engineering and not the positive perspective. In this paper, I will be talking about how Genetic engineering is connected to Brave New World, how the history of

The term designer children is unnerving at first to many. The idea of parents designing the genetic makeup of their offspring makes children seem like a commodity in a genetic free market. Thoughts of a dystopian society like the one in the film “Gattaca” come to mind. However, taking an immediate repugnant stand against genetic enhancement is not well-founded. A more open-minded inspection of the issue reveals that the idea of parents improving their children’s life prospects through genetic engineering (provided it is safe) is, at its core, not unethical. In fact, some genetic enhancement in addition to correcting deleterious genes to prevent disease is a moral obligation. It is moral to make rational decisions using the science and

The birth of a child is supposed to be a time of joy, the uncertainty of life leads to this one point in time. Will she or he be the next president, a star athlete, a genius or just fall into the crowd as another citizen. With recent advancements in science, this uncertainty has become a thing of the past. The human being is now seen as a commodity and no more is valued in the uncertainty of individuality. The parent can now choose how they want their child to come out or develop into. Sandel’s book The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Case of Modern Eugenics is a well researched look into examples of modern eugenics and the problems that arise from it. These topics range from the ethics of cloning, athletes using performance enhancing drugs, and other practical uses in everyday life. Sandel’s argument is that there is value in human nature (even with all its flaws), and genetic engineering will forever change human nature. Destroying the very essence of what it is to be human and scarring humanity. The main features of human nature that will be altered: are responsibility, humility and solidarity.

Although this may be the case in many areas of people’s lives today, it is not always beneficial, or necessary. People may have trouble deciding whether messing with human genes and cells is ethical. Designing the “perfect child” in many parent’s eyes becomes a harsh question of reality. The concept of a parent’s unconditional love for their child is questioned because of the desire to make their child perfect. If genetically engineering humans becomes a dominant medical option, people could have the chance to create their child however they like: from physical appearances, genetically enhanced genes, and the possibility to decide what a child thinks and acts, parents have access to designing their entire child. Naturally, people could be creating a super-human. Issues between different races, and eventually creating new prejudices against genetically engineered humans may increase. People may not realize how expensive genetic screening is at first. With only the rich being able to “enhance” their children, another social issue might occur, giving the world another type of people to outcast.

This essay will explore how the media shapes the formal and informal policing of child murders within the family. Through case studies, an exploration of government policies and legislation, the essay will illustrate how the media has created moral panics around stranger danger, despite the fact that major harm to children is generally caused by families and their friends. Throughout our upbringing one is taught not to speak to strangers because they are the ones who are most likely to bring harm upon us. The people found most trustworthy are normally family members and family friends. Most people would, without a second thought trust their children’s life with family or friends. This essay will explore definitions of the family, moral panics, formal and informal policing. Furthermore, this essay will seek to address how the media is seen to be the fourth estate of power. It will also discuss the power of the media and how the media frames and shapes moral panics, which consequently might give a misleading picture of the situation, through the demonization of strangers and how the media labels individuals within society. Finally, in order to answer the above question, the essay will look into cases and legislation to identify how governmental agencies have failed children who are deemed at risk.

On the most surface level, human genetic engineering and human genetic modification are a new and rapidly developing field of science that deals with directly altering the DNA (genetic makeup) of a living human cell. From early science fiction to the present day, taking control of humans’ gen es and directing the flow of evolution has been a subject of debate for many people. Human genetic engineering or HGE tends to bring up thoughts of dystopian futures where altering DNA has unexpectedly resulted in horrible mutant humans that can’t survive and thus the human race perishes, but this is not necessarily the outcome. Since genetic engineering is an emerging field of science, there are still many moral and ethical issues that need to be addressed before continuing research. Atheists and theists both have valid reasons to support / resist the continuation of this field of science. For the purpose of this paper, it will be assumed the reader has a reasonable understanding of the terms atheism, theism, DNA, genes, genome, and how a persons DNA (their genotype) essentially dictates the physical appearance and abilities that person portrays (their phenotype).

Human genetic engineering should be banned because it harms the human race since we would be reducing our genetic diversity through this radical process. Human genetic engineering simply eliminates the “undesirable” traits and encourages specific “desirable” traits. With the endless possibilities of choosing what to eliminate, inevitably the “desirable” traits are picked and chosen on whim decisions such as blonde hair, blue eyes, a slender figure, and tall height (Act For Libraries). According to the British Medical Journal, this idea of designing a baby based on cosmetics is called unrealistic and arbitrary standards of perfection (Caplan). Unrealistic and arbitrary standards of perfection will create identical genomes among humans. Obviously, there would be a tremendous drop in genetic diversity as a result of this. Moreover, when defective genes are replaced with functional genes inevitably, there is a reduction of genetic diversity and causes the human population, as a whole, to be more susceptible to disease and virus (Patra). As shown by this, the “undesirable’ traits are annihilated and “desirable” or functional genes in this instance are promoted. Although scientists for genetic engineering will promote the “eradication of genetic disorders and diseases,” once they are diminished to the best of their ability there would still be a yearn to “perfect” the human race. Instead of annihilating disease we would also be annihilating cosmetic traits we don’t want to see in

The key problems, which I unfortunately was unable to identify in my first assessment, would be the lack of digital and collaborative learning practices in my teaching. These could be due to the following reasons: